Confusions around the term Hindutva

Ram Puniyani

On October 25 (2016) the seven member Supreme Court Bench started hearing to revisit ‘Hindutva’ cases. These are group of cases where the use of term Hindutva-Hinduism to be used during elections is to be opined. One such case was that of Manohar Joshi who in his election speech said that if he is voted to power he will work for making Maharashtra as the first Hindu state in the country. In another incident Bal Thackeray, Shiv Sena founder and supremo of BJP associate Shiv Sena, said in November 1987, declared that his party is contesting elections “for the protection of Hinduism, we do not care for the votes of the Muslims. The country belongs to Hindus”.  And “[The Muslims] should bear in mind that this country is of Hindus, the same shall remain of Hindus... if Shiv Sena comes to power… everybody will have to take diksha (initiation) into Hindu religion.”

The 1995 Judgment, where Justice Varma opined that the word ‘Hindutva’, “is used and understood as a synonym of ‘Indianisation’, i.e. development of uniform culture by obliterating the differences between all the cultures coexisting in the country.” This came to be known as ‘Hindutva as a way of life’, judgment and became popular as ‘Hindutva judgment’, was used by RSS combine to reinforce their Hindu rashtra agenda. In Guruvayoor temple case again similar opinion was given. Also one recalls that way back in 1966 in a case involving Satsangis, who were asking for status of a separate religion, the court had given the similar opinion, that Hinduism is a way of life, so where is the question of Satsangis being given the status of a separate religion? This does not exhaust the list of such judgments in this category. 

Teesta Setalvad, eminent social activist, has intervened in the court in the matter with an application stating that religion and politics should not be mixed and a direction be passed to de-link religion from politics. The hearing of the case is on. This is a great opportunity for the court to clear the air about the terms Hinduism and Hindutva. So far many opinions have been given that since Hinduism has so much diversity, so it is not a religion and that it includes all the communities so ‘it’s a ‘way of life’ The words Hinduism and Hindutva have been used interchangeably many a times. 

The confusion and nature of the word Hinduism and Hindutva emerge as Hinduism is not a prophet based religion; with a clear cut single Holy book the teachings of the prophet or a single God. Its nature is different from prophet based religions like Christianity, Buddhism, Islam and Sikhism for that matter. It has been identified with Vedas, where the life and norms of Aryans is expressed. In matters of faith starting from animism to atheism may come under its umbrella. The term Hinduism itself came into usage from eighth Century onwards. The term was coined by those coming here from Central Asia and they coined the word Hindu as a derivative of the word Sindhu which they had to cross to this part of the sub continent. Essentially what were prevalent here were multiple religious traditions, Brahmanism, Nath, Tantra, Siddha, Shiava Siddhanta and later Bhakti also. The first construction of Hinduism takes place to refer to these diverse tendencies. Later Hinduism as religion starts being referred to for the people around these sects. Jainism and Buddhism were also present in good measure. With British coming the construction of Hinduism became well delineated. With seeds of communalism coming up Hinduism started being contrasted against Islam and Christianity in particular. 

VD Savarkar

In late early twentieth century ideologue of Hindu nationalism, Savarkar put forward the concept of Hindutva in a sharper way to present it as ‘whole of Hinduness’, i.e. it includes Hindu religion as conceived by them and also it includes the politics of Hindu nationalism. So inherent in the term was religion, Hinduism, which had the dominant part of Brahmanism, and it was blended with the Hindu nationalism. Hindu nationalism was being projected by the upper caste, landlord-kings sections of Hindus who were weary of the emerging “India as a nation in the making and accompanying ideas of Liberty, Equality and Fraternity. The Hindu nationalists upheld the scriptures like Manu Smiriti, while the majority of Hindus led by Gandhi were aspiring for secular democratic ethos.

Hinduism is the most complex umbrella where interpretations are dominated by the caste factors. Ambedkar does point out that Hinduism is a Brahmanic theology. Other streams of Hinduism. Nath Tantra, Bhakti etc. have been marginalized and undermined and it’s around Brahmanical hierarchy that Hindutva movement has emerged. It’s clear that Hinduism is not the religion of all the Indians. Also that Hinduva has been built around Brahmanical stream of Hinduism. This complex understanding needs to be unraveled before opining on the Representation of People’s Act. In S. R. Bommai case the court the Supreme Court recognized the value of this understanding of terms Hinduism-Hindutva. Justice B.P. Jeevan Reddy wrote, “To fight elections on a plank of religion, was tantamount to eroding the country’s secular fabric.” But, barely a year later, this was subverted when India’s secular credentials came to be undermined with the rulings known as ‘Hindutva cases’.

The foundation of this understanding is already there in what Dr. Ambedkar writes, B.R. Ambedkar, who played a sterling role in the RPA’s drafting; his aim was to ensure that the statute conformed to secular principles. “I think that elections ought to be conducted on issues which have nothing to do with… religion or culture,”. Further that “A political party should not be permitted to appeal to any emotion which is aroused by reason of something which has nothing to do with the daily affairs of the people.” This is the spirit of Indian Constitution which wants to separate religion from politics.

It is a Historic opportunity for the Court to set the matters straight and put the norms back to the basic structure of Indian Constitution, the values of secularism. And finally Hindutva is revolving around Hinduism which is religion to be sure.

[November 09, 2016]

Read More

Subversion at Work: Astrology Discredited in the Vālmīki Rāmāyaṇa, Ayodhyākāṇḍa

Ramkrishna Bhattacharya

An advertisement published in the Times of India (Kolkata edition) on December 10, 2014 entered by Nakshatra Diamond Jewellery (certified by Gemological Science International, International Gemological Institute, Independent Gemological Laboratories and others) contained a half-page picture of a bejewelled Bollywood film-star. The advertisement was entitled ‘This Pushya Nakshatra / Buy from the amazing collection at Nakshatra & usher in blessings, luck & success in your life.’

The day the moon enters Puṣya, the eighth of the twenty seven lunar mansions/constellations (nakṣatra). Indian astrologers consider this day to be auspicious, particularly for the coronation of kings (puṣyābhiṣeka). Puṣya in a general sense stands, among other things, for ‘nourishment’. In fact the whole month of Pauṣa in the Hindu calendar is supposed to be lucky or propitious for all activities, such as marriage, house warming (gṛhapraveśa), etc.¹

Painting: Raja Ravi Varma

Puṣya was known in the early Vedic times (Ṛgveda 1.191.12, also Atharva-veda 5.4.4). It was also known as Tiṣya (Ṛgveda 5.54.13, 10.64.8). Pāṇini mentions it along with a synonym, Siddha/Sidhya² in the Aṣṭādhyāyī 3.1.116 (‘púṣ-ya- and sídh-ya- are introduced to denote asterisms (nákṣatre),’ puṣya-siddhau nakṣatre).³ Puṣya literally means ‘increased wealth’ as Sidhya stands for ‘achieves success in this’ (Katre p. 212). A detailed description of the benefits accruing from a bath on the day the moon enters Puṣya is found in the Kālikā-Purāṇa, chapter 86. The king should take the bath, for it would ensure good fortune, welfare and wipe out the possibility of famine and epidemic of death.⁴

Varāhamihira also waxes eloquent on the power of Puṣya:

There are no portents whose evil effects are irremediable by Pushya Snāna and there are no ceremonies calculated to do a king as much good as the ceremony of Pushya Homa [ritual].

The king that desires an increase in power and the king that desires sons will be benefited by Pushya Snāna [bath at the time of Pushya].

Thus have been stated by Bṛhaspati to Indra the rules relating the ceremony of Pushya Snāna – for longevity, increase of progeny/subjects and of fortune. (Bṛhatsaṃhitā 48.84-87. Translation amended)

Pushya is mentioned in several lexicons and other sources (see Böhtlingk-Roth, s.v.). More interesting, however, is the fact that the Rāmāyaṇa Book 2 (Ayodhyā-kāṇḍa, the Book of Ayodhyā), refers to Puṣya, not once or twice, but several times in all in connection with the coronation of Rāma, but with quite an opposite effect.

#

Daśaratha convened the chief men of the land from the various cities and provinces from the fourcorners, ‘aryan and barbarian, and others who lived in the forest and mountain regions in which they lived’ (mlecchāś cāryāś ca ye cānye vanaśailāntavāsinaḥ 2.3.9ab). and told them:

‘My body has grown old in the shade of the white parasol. I have lived a life of many, countless, years, and now I crave repose for this aged body of mine…

to invest Rāma, champion of righteousness and bull among men, with the office of prince regent, a union as propitious as the moon’s with the constellation Puṣya. (crit. ed. 2.2.10, p.41)⁵

Then he called Rāma to the assembly and told him:

And since by your virtues you have won the loyalty of these my subjects, you shall become prince regent on the day of Puṣya’s conjunction. (2.3.24, p.51)

The course of events that followed refers to Puṣya again and again:

After the townsmen had gone, the king held further consultation with his counsellors. When he learned what they had determined the lord [Daśaratha] declared with determination: “Tomorrow is Puṣya, so tomorrow my son Rāma, his eyes as coppery as lotuses, shall be consecrated as prince regent.” (2.4.1-2, p.51)

When the assembled chiefs and counsellors were gone Daśarath again called Rāma and told him:

Rāma, I have had dreams lately, inauspicious, ominous dreams. Great meteors and lightning bolts out of a clear sky have been falling nearby with a terrible crash. The astrologers also inform me, Rāma, that my birth star is obstructed by hostile planets, Angāraka, Rāhu and the sun. When such portents as these appear it usually means a king is about to die or meet with some dreadful misfortune. You must therefore have yourself consecrated, Rāghava, before my resolve fails me. For the minds of men are changeable. Today the moon has reached Punarvasu, just to the east of Puṣya; tomorrow, the astrologers predict, its conjunction with Puṣya is certain. On this very Puṣya day you must therefore have yourself consecrated, Rāghava, before my resolve fails me. On this very Puṣya day you must have yourself consecrated – I feel a sense of great urgency. Tomorrow, slayer of enemies, I will consecrate you as prince regent. (2.4.12-22, p.55)

Some may very well think of this passage as an act of subversion. The royal astrologers could foretell about Daśaratha’s death but could not foresee that Rama was not destined to be made the prince regent. The counsellors of Daśaratha too proved to be no better, although they were sages of repute. They too did not foresee that all attempts to consecrate Rāma would prove to be futile: Daśaratha was not destined to see his eldest son enthroned.

Let us look at the following passages that go on hammering on the auspiciousness of Pusya, credulously repeated by other characters of the epic:

At that moment Kauśalyā stood with her eyes closed, while Sumitrā, Sītā and Lakṣmaṇa were seated behind her. From the moment she received word that her son was to be consecrated as prince regent on Pushya day, she had been controlling her breathing and meditating on the Primal Being, Janārdana. (2.4.30-33, p.57)

Now, Kaikeyī’s family servant, who had lived with her from the time of her birth, had happened to ascend to the rooftop terrace that shone like the moon. From the terrace Mantharā could see all Ayodhyā – the king’s way newly sprinkled, the lotuses and water lilies strewn about, the costly ornamental pennants and banners, the sprinkling of sandalwood water and the crowds of freshly bathed people. Seeing a nursemaid standing nearby, Mantharā asked:

“Why is Rāma’s mother so delighted and giving away money

to people, when she has always been so miserly? Tell me,

why are the people displaying such boundless delight? Has

something happened to delight the lord of earth? What is he

planning to do?”

Bursting with delight and out of sheer gladness the nursemaid told the hunchback Mantharā about the greater majesty in store for Rāghava:

“Tomorrow on Puṣya day King Daśaratha is going to consecrate Rāma Rāghava as prince regent, the blameless prince who has mastered his anger.” (2.7.5-8ab, p.71)

Mantharā then proceeded to visit Kaikeyī. She found her quite happy with the news of Rāma’s coronation. The queen even presented her with a lovely piece of jewellery.

But Mantharā was beside herself with rage and sorrow. She threw the jewellery away and said spitefully: 

“You foolish woman, how can you be delighted at such a moment? Are you not aware that you stand in the midst of a sea of grief? It is Kauśalyā who is fortunate; it is her son the eminent brahmans will consecrate as the powerful prince regent tomorrow, on Puṣya day. Once Kauśalyā secures this great object of joy, she will cheerfully eliminate her enemies. (2.8.1-3, p.75)

In the mean time, the work of consecration has begun.

The ministers, the leaders of the army and the leading merchants joyfully convened for Rāghava’s consecration. When the bright sun had risen and Pushya day had come, the chief Brahmans made the preparations for Rāma’s consecration. (2.13.1-3, p.107)

When Rāma went back to meet his spouse, his demeneour betrayed his misgivings:

Sītā started up and began to tremble as she looked at her husband consumed with grief, his senses numb with anxious care. When she saw how his face was drained of color, how he sweated and chafed, she was consumed with sorrow. “What is the meaning of this, my lord?” she asked. Today was surely the day for which the learned brahmans had forecast the conjunction of Puṣya, the majestic constellation ruled by Bṛhaspati. Why are you so sad, Rāghava? The hundred-ribbed parasol with its hue of white-capped water is not throwing its shade upon your handsome face. (2.23.5-8, p.161)

Thus, contrary to all expectations, instead of being crowned as the sovereign of Kośala, Rāma was forced to go to exile for fourteen years. The prediction of the astrologers and the endeavours of his father’s counsellors came to naught. So much for the alleged beneficial effect of Puṣya.⁶ The astrologers and cunsellors did not warn Daśaratha of the consequences if he tried to empower Rāma as the King of Kośala.

#

Why should the author of this Book, or more specifically, of this section (added, according to Brockington p.329, at the second stage of redaction), repeatedly disparage the royal astrologers and counsellors by pointing out, not once or twice, but several times, the alleged beneficial effect of a day (when the moon enters Puṣya) and the opposite result that followed? The Rāmāyaṇa itself is in all respects a pro-Establishment work, basically male-dominated and conservative in approach concerning all social and political questions. The debunking of astrologers stands out as a significant piece of dissidence not expected in a Brahmanical work. In the Indian tradition the Rāmāyaṇa is not considered to be a secular epic (mahākāvya). On the other hand, it is the first work composed by the ‘first poet’ (ādikavi). Vālmīki was so regarded even in the first century ce, as evidenced in Life of the Buddha (Buddhacarita) by the Buddhist poet, Aśvaghoṣa. He writes: ‘And Vālmīki was the first to create the verse’ (vālmīkirādau ca sasarja padyaṃ, 1.43). The discrediting of astrology, or at least of royal astrologers, is an unexpected radical trait in the received text of the Rāmāyaṇa in all its recensions and versions. It is strange that neither P.L. Vaidya, the editor of the Ayodhyākāṇḍa in the crit. ed., nor any scholar, Indian or foreign, writing on the Rāmāyaṇa pays the least attention to the irony inherent in the repeated reference to Puṣya and the failure of the astrologers in determining the fate awaiting Rāma. Vaidya commenting on 2.4.19-20, writes:

The reason for immediate coronation of Rāma as indicated here is that stars do not seem to be favourable to Daśaratha, and even suggest calamities like death or change of mind. The good and auspicious idea in the mind of Daśaratha, therefore, requires to be put into action immediately (p.695).

This is to miss the mark. Vaidya does not say a word about astrology and its failure. He is concerned solely with the ethical questions arising out of the situation. Nor does Sheldon Pollock, in his otherwise admirable translation, spend a single word to point out the irony of the circumstances. 
 

#

All this automatically raises the obvious question: how could such an anti-Establishment view find place and continue to hold it in a ‘sacred text’ like the Rāmāyaṇa?

The only tentative answer I can offer is that, even among the redactors of the Ayodhyākāṇḍa of the Rāmāyaṇa there must have been one who had some grudge against astrology, perhaps because he himself had been a victim of deception of false prophecy. Or he might have a freethinker (rarely met with, but not altogether non-existent in any phase of Indian history), not believing in astrological predictions. There is no gainsaying that the irony of the situation is enhanced by the welfare expected of Puṣya and the disaster that fell on Rāma’s life. There is an oral tradition which says that the adherents of the Nyāya philosophy used to scoff at the astrologers by saying, ‘Astrology is (rendered) fruitless by the banishment of Rāma from his kingdom’ (viphalaṃ jyotiṣaṃ śāstraṃ rāme rājyavivāsite).⁷ This was in response to a maxim vaunted by the astrologers, ‘Astrology is productive (lit. fruitful) where the sun and the moon are (its) witnesses’ (saphalaṃ jyotiṣaṃ śāstram candrārkau yatra sākṣiṇau).

The redactor of this section of the Rāmāyaṇa Book 2 must have been an ancestor of the Naiyāyikas who ridiculed astrology by citing the case of Rāma’s banishment.

Appendix A

Sanskrit passages from the Rāmāyaṇa (critical edition)

taṃ candram iva puṣyeṇa yuktaṃ dharmabhṛtāṃ varam |
yauvarājyena yoktāsmi prītaḥ puruṣapuṃgavam || (crit. ed. 2.2.10)

tvayā yataḥ prajāś cemāḥ svaguṇair anurañjitāḥ |
tasmāt tvaṃ puṣyayogena yauvarājyam avāpnuhi || (2.3.24)

gateṣv atha nṛpo bhūyaḥ paureṣu saha mantribhiḥ |
mantrayitvā tataś cakre niścayajñaḥ sa niścayam ||
śva eva puṣyo bhavitā śvo 'bhiṣecyeta me sutaḥ |
rāmo rājīvatāmrākṣo yauvarājya iti prabhuḥ || (2.4.1-2)

rāma vṛddho 'smi dīrghāyur bhuktā bhogā mayepsitāḥ |
annavadbhiḥ kratuśatais tatheṣṭaṃ bhūridakṣiṇaiḥ ||
jātam iṣṭam apatyaṃ me tvam adyānupamaṃ bhuvi |
dattam iṣṭam adhītaṃ ca mayā puruṣasattama ||
anubhūtāni ceṣṭāni mayā vīra sukhāni ca |
devarṣi pitṛviprāṇām anṛṇo 'smi tathātmanaḥ ||
na kiṃ cin mama kartavyaṃ tavānyatrābhiṣecanāt |
ato yat tvām ahaṃ brūyāṃ tan me tvaṃ kartum arhasi ||
adya prakṛtayaḥ sarvās tvām icchanti narādhipam |
atas tvāṃ yuvarājānam abhiṣekṣyāmi putraka ||
api cādyāśubhān rāma svapnān paśyāmi dāruṇān |
sanirghātā maholkāś ca patantīha mahāsvanāḥ ||
avaṣṭabdhaṃ ca me rāma nakṣatraṃ dāruṇair grahaiḥ |
āvedayanti daivajñāḥ sūryāṅgārakarāhubhiḥ ||
prāyeṇa hi nimittānām īdṛśānāṃ samudbhave |
rājā vā mṛtyum āpnoti ghorāṃ vāpadam ṛcchati ||
tad yāvad eva me ceto na vimuhyati rāghava |
tāvad evābhiṣiñcasva calā hi prāṇināṃ matiḥ ||
adya candro 'bhyupagataḥ puṣyāt pūrvaṃ punar vasum |
śvaḥ puṣya yogaṃ niyataṃ vakṣyante daivacintakāḥ ||
tatra puṣye 'bhiṣiñcasva manas tvarayatīva mām |
śvas tvāham abhiṣekṣyāmi yauvarājye paraṃtapa || (2.4.12-22)

tatra tāṃ pravaṇām eva mātaraṃ kṣaumavāsinīm |
vāgyatāṃ devatāgāre dadarśa yācatīṃ śriyam ||
prāg eva cāgatā tatra sumitrā lakṣmaṇas tathā |
sītā cānāyitā śrutvā priyaṃ rāmābhiṣecanam ||
tasmin kāle hi kausalyā tasthāv āmīlitekṣaṇā |
sumitrayānvāsyamānā sītayā lakṣmaṇena ca ||
śrutvā puṣyeṇa putrasya yauvarājyābhiṣecanam |
prāṇāyāmena puruṣaṃ dhyāyamānā janārdanam || (2.4.30-33)

rāmamātā dhanaṃ kiṃ nu janebhyaḥ saṃprayacchati |
atimātraṃ praharṣo 'yaṃ kiṃ janasya ca śaṃsa me ||
kārayiṣyati kiṃ vāpi saṃprahṛṣṭo mahīpatiḥ |
vidīryamāṇā harṣeṇa dhātrī paramayā mudā ||
ācacakṣe 'tha kubjāyai bhūyasīṃ rāghave śriyam |
śvaḥ puṣyeṇa jitakrodhaṃ yauvarājyena rāghavam ||
rājā daśaratho rāmam abhiṣecayitānagham | (2.7.5-8ab)

mantharā tv abhyasūyyainām utsṛjyābharaṇaṃ ca tat |
uvācedaṃ tato vākyaṃ kopaduḥkhasamanvitā ||
harṣaṃ kim idam asthāne kṛtavaty asi bāliśe |
śokasāgaramadhyastham ātmānaṃ nāvabudhyase ||
subhagā khalu kausalyā yasyāḥ putro 'bhiṣekṣyate |
yauvarājyena mahatā śvaḥ puṣyeṇa dvijottamaiḥ || (2.8.1-3)

te tu tāṃ rajanīm uṣya brāhmaṇā vedapāragāḥ |
upatasthur upasthānaṃ saharājapurohitāḥ ||
amātyā balamukhyāś ca mukhyā ye nigamasya ca |
rāghavasyābhiṣekārthe prīyamāṇās tu saṃgatāḥ ||
udite vimale sūrye puṣye cābhyāgate 'hani |
abhiṣekāya rāmasya dvijendrair upakalpitam || (2.13.1-3)

praviveśātha rāmas tu svaveśma suvibhūṣitam |prahṛṣṭajanasaṃpūrṇaṃ hriyā kiṃ cid avāṅmukhaḥ ||atha sītā samutpatya vepamānā ca taṃ patim |apaśyac chokasaṃtaptaṃ cintāvyākulilendriyam ||vivarṇavadanaṃ dṛṣṭvā taṃ prasvinnam amarṣaṇam |āha duḥkhābhisaṃtaptā kim idānīm idaṃ prabho ||adya bārhaspataḥ śrīmān yuktaḥ puṣyo na rāghava |procyate brāhmaṇaiḥ prājñaiḥ kena tvam asi durmanāḥ || (2.23.5-8)

Puṣya occurs in the following verses in the vulgate: 2.12ab, 3.41ab, 4.2ab, 4.22ab, 4.33ab, 7.11ab, 8.9cd, 15.3ab, and 26.8 ab.

Notes:

1 Since the month of Pauṣa comes after the harvesting season, cultivators and traders are in a relatively prosperous state, and have some money to spare. There is a Bangla proverb, kāro pauṣmās kāro sarvanāś (To one the month to prosper ( Pauṣa), to another, disaster). A festival is also held in every Bengali Hindu household at the last day of Pauṣa. Several types of cocoanut confectionaries are prepared and people are invited to partake of them.

2 The other two synonyms are Tiṣya and Puṣyā.

3 Commenting on Aṣṭ 2.3.45 (nakṣatre ca lupi), Katre provides an example: ‘One should drink a milkshake when the asterism Puṣya is in conjunction with the moon,’ puṣyena/puṣye pāyasaṃ aśnīyāt (p.148)

4 pauṣe puṣyar kṣage candre puṣyasnānaṃ nṛpaś caret |

saubhāgye-kalyāṇakaraṃ durbhikṣa-maraṇākahaṃ || (Kālikā-Purāṇa 86.2, p. 879). 
 

This verse is quoted in the Śabda-kalpa-druma, a Sanskrit-Sanskrit dictionary, from which it is re-quoted in Böhtlingk-Roth’s Sanskrit-Wörterbuch.

5 For the critically edited constituted text of the original Sanskrit passages, see Appendix A below. A vulgate text with an English translation is to be found in <http://www.valmikiramayan.net/utf8/ayodhya/sarga2/ayodhya_2_frame.htm>

6 It may be mentioned in this connection that there are several floating verses (udbhaṭa-śokas) of unknown authorship satirizing astrologers. Some of them have been collected in the anthology, Subhāṣita-ratna-bhāṇḍāgāra under the head, ‘Censure of Evil Astrologers’ (kugaṇaka-nindā).

7 These two maxims have been cited by S. Thakur in 1982/1988 p. 22. To the best of my knowledge they had never been recorded before. Enquiries with Nyāya specialists such as Professor M.K. Gangopadhyaya and Professor Prabal Kumar Sen too confirmed this conclusion. Thakur in his short note, however, discusses Daśaratha’s speeches alone; he does not mention those of others.

Works Cited

Aśvaghoṣa. The Buddhacarita. Ed. and trans. E. H. Johnston. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1978 (first pub. 1936).

Aṣṭādhyāyī of Pāṇini. Ed. and trans. S. M. Katre. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1989.

Böhtlingk, Otto and Rudolf Roth. Sanskrit-Wörterbuch. Delhi: Motilal Banrsidass, 1990 (reprint).

Brockington, J. L. Righteous Rāma: the Evolution of an Epic. Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1984.

Kālikāpurāṇa. Ed. Panchanana Tarkaratna, revised by Srijiva Nyayatirtha. Kalikata: Nababharata Publishers, 1384 Bangla Sal.

Katre, S. M. See Aṣṭādhyāyī of Pāṇini.

Rāmāyaṇa of Vālmīki. Vol. 2. Ed. Shastri Shrinivas Katti Mudholkara. Delhi: Parimal Publications, 1983. (vulgate)

Rāmāyaṇa, Book 2, Ayodhyā by Valmīki. Trans. Sheldon Pollock.Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2005.

Śabdakalpadruma (1822-58). Compiled by the Pundits appointed by Radhakanta Deva. Delhi: MLBD, 1961 reprint.

Subhāṣita-ratna-bhāṇḍāgāra. Narayan Ram Acharya (ed.). Bombay: Nirnay Sagar Press, 1952, newly edited by Kashinath Pandurang Parab. Śrīsubhāṣitaratnabhāṇḍāgāraṃ. Revised by Wasudev Laxman Panashikar. Delhi: Eastern Book Links, 1991.

Thakur, Srikrishnaciatanya. Jyotiṣīder bhāgya gaṇanā upahāsa karechen Vālmīki (Vālmīki ridicules the astrologers’ calulation). Utsa Mānush, October-November 1982, reprinted in Vijñāna Jyotiṣa Samāja. Kolkata: Utsa Mānush, 1988 (first published 1983), 22-24.

Vālmīki Rāmāyaṇa,The. Critically edited by G.H. Bhatt and others. Baroda: Oriental Institute, 1960-75.

Varāhamihira. Bṛhatsaṃhitā with [saṃhitā-]Vivṛti by Utpalabhaṭṭa. Ed. Avadha Vihari Tripathi. Varanasi: Sampurnanand Sanskrit Vishvavidyalaya, 1968.

Varāha Mihira. Brihat Samhitā. Trans. N. Chidambaram Iyer. Madras, 1884.

Viśvakoṣa. Compiled and published by Nagendranath Vasu. Vol. 12. Kalikata, 1308 Bangla Sal (1901ce).

Acknowledgements: Amitava Bhattacharyya, Sourav Basak, and Sunish Kumar Deb. The usual disclaimers apply.

Ramkrishna Bhattacharya taught English at the University of Calcutta, Kolkata and was an Emeritus Fellow of University Grants Commission. He is now a Fellow of PAVLOV Institute, Kolkata.

Email ID: ramkrishna.bhattacharya@gmail.com)

Read More

Doctoring History for Political Goals: Origin of Caste System in India

Ram Puniyani

Caste hierarchy is the major obstacle to the goal of social justice and it continues to be a major obstacle to social progress even today. There are many a theories, which have tried to understand its origin. The latest in the series is the attempt of RSS to show its genesis due to invasion of Muslim kings. Three books written by RSS ideologues argue that Islamic atrocities during medieval period resulted in emergence of untouchables and low castes.  The books are "Hindu Charmakar Jati", "Hindu Khatik Jati" and "Hindu Valmiki Jati".

The Sangh leaders claimed that these castes had come into existence due to atrocities by foreign invaders and did not exist in Hindu religion earlier. According to Bhaiyyaji Joshi, number two in RSS hierarchy, 'shudras' were never untouchables in Hindu scriptures. 'Islamic atrocities' during the medieval age resulted in the emergence of untouchables, Dalits. Joshi further elaborated, "To violate Hindu swabhiman (dignity) of Chanwarvanshiya Kshatriyas, foreign invaders from Arab, Muslim rulers and beef-eaters, forced them to do abominable works like killing cows, skinning them and throwing their carcasses in deserted places. Foreign invaders thus created a caste of charma-karma (dealing with skin) by giving such works as punishment to proud Hindu prisoners."

The truth is contrary to this. The foundations of the caste system are very old and untouchability came as an accompaniment of the caste system. The Aryans considered themselves superior, they called non-Aryans krshna varnya (dark skinned), anasa (those with no nose), and since non-Aryans worshipped the phallus, they were considered non-human or amanushya. (Rig Veda: X.22.9) There are quotes in the Rig Veda and Manusmriti to show that low castes were prohibited from coming close to the high castes and they were to live outside the village. While this does not imply that a full-fledged caste system had come into being in Rig Vedic times, the four-fold division of society into varnas did exist, which became a fairly rigid caste system by the time of the Manusmriti.

Untouchability became the accompaniment of the caste system sometime around the first century ad. The Manusmriti, written in the second–third centuries ad, codifies the existing practices which show with utmost clarity the type of despicable social practices that the oppressor castes were imposing upon the oppressed castes. The first major incursions of Muslim invaders into India began around the eleventh century ad, and the European conquests of India began in the seventeenth–eighteenth centuries.

Over time, the caste system became hereditary. The rules for social intercourse as well as establishing marriage relations were laid down by the caste system. Caste hierarchies also became rigid over time. The shudras began to be excluded from caste society, and ‘upper’ castes were barred from inter-dining or inter-marrying with them. Notions of ‘purity’ and ‘pollution’ were enforced strictly to maintain caste boundaries. Shudras became ‘untouchables’. It is this rigid social division that Manu’s Manav Dharmashastra (Human Law Code) codified.

Golwalkar, the major ideologue of RSS ideology defended it in a different way, ‘If a developed society realizes that the existing differences are due to the scientific social structure and that they indicate the different limbs of body social, the diversity (i.e. caste system, added) would not be construed as a blemish.’ (Organiser, 1 December 1952, p. 7) Deendayal Upadhyaya, another major ideologue of Sangh Parivar stated, ‘In our concept of four castes (varnas), they are thought of as different limbs of virat purush (the primeval man)… These limbs are not only complimentary to one another but even further there is individuality, unity. There is a complete identity of interests, identity, belonging… If this idea is not kept alive, the caste; instead of being complimentary can produce conflict. But then that is a distortion.’ (D. Upadhyaya, Integral Humanism, New Delhi, Bharatiya Jansangh, 1965, p. 43) 

Social struggles to oppose this system and the struggles to escape the tyrannies of caste system are presented by Ambedkar as revolution and counter-revolution. He divides the ‘pre-Muslim’ period into three stages: (a) Brahmanism (the Vedic period); (b) Buddhism, connected with rise of first Magadh-Maurya states and representing the revolutionary denial of caste inequalities; and (c) ‘Hinduism’, or the counter revolution which consolidated brahman dominance and the caste hierarchy.

Much before the invasion of Muslim kings, shudras were treated as untouchables and were the most oppressed and exploited sections of society. The rigidity and cruelty of the caste system and untouchability became very intense from the post-Vedic to Gupta period. Later, new social movements like Bhakti, directly, and Sufi, indirectly, partly reduced the intensity of the caste oppression and untouchability. This doctoring of the history by Sangh ideologues is motivated by their political agenda and tries to hide the truth.

Read More

Is the Face of Hinduism Changing?

Ram Puniyani

Fali S Nariman recently made a very significant observation on the current political situation in India. The distinguished Constitutional jurist noted:

“Hinduism has traditionally been the most tolerant of all Indian faiths. But, recurrent instances of religious tension, fanned by fanaticism and hate speech, have shown that the Hindu tradition of tolerance is showing signs of strain...my apprehension is that Hinduism is somehow changing its benign face...” 

There is no doubt that Mr Nariman’s observation came in reaction to recent outpourings from some organizations or establishments that subscribe to the ideology of RSS. He is concerned about the aggressive Hindutva ideology of those who seek to turn India into a Hindu nation or asserting that it is indeed a Hindu nation.    

Hinduism is a religion, while Hindutva is a political ideology. 

Recently from some self-styled champions of Hindutva we have witnessed innumerable outbursts of hate speeches on issues ranging from the propaganda of what they call “love jihad” to the ideological assertions that in India ‘we are all Hindus’. 

They have also unleashed an attack on the liberal Hinduism. They are telling those Hindus, who accept Shirdi Sai Baba- a Sufi born in Muslim family, as their God, that they are doing it wrong. 

Fali S Nariman

In a broad pattern of their attack they target the religious minorities in one way or the other. The basic question we need to address is whether the voices coming from the RSS combine represent actual Hinduism or they are related to the new practice of politics in the name of Hinduism? The question becomes more pertinent when we see group like Al Qaeda or ISIS acting against humanity, in the name of Islam. 

During the freedom movement, we saw men like Gandhi and Maulana Azad, who, despite being deeply steeped in their religions, came forward and led a political movement, which was secular to the core. During the time we also saw people like Jinnah and Savarkar, who were not religious in the real sense, but they led the politics in the name of Islam and Hinduism, respectively. 

RSS combine identifies Hinduism mainly with the narrow stream of Hinduism, or rather, Brahmanism. Hinduism is not based on a single book, prophet or a clergy. Polytheism being at its root, the religion has many theologies, practices and a plethora of holy scriptures. 

Gandhi followed a liberal tradition of Hinduism and while laying the foundation of Indian nationalism during the freedom movement, he did not let religion intrude the politics. In contrast, the Hindu nationalism, which is being propounded by those claiming to be representing Hindus- Hindu Mahasabha, RSS and their offshoots is narrow and intolerant. 

Since large sections of Hindus, were following Gandhi, the illiberal Hindu Mahasabha-RSS brand of Hinduism, remained on the margins during those days. But, during the last three decades, starting with the Ram Temple agitation, the Hindu nationalist-driven political campaign has thrown up the intolerant propaganda about the ‘others’ in a blatant way. With the current dispensation where BJP is leading the coalition, the leaders of the ruling Hindu nationalist party and its affiliate organizations are being patronized by the state which has helped them intensify the hate propaganda against the country’s religious minorities. 

Their pronouncements are aimed to intimidate those who do not agree to their version of state and politics. The politics of RSS is not just intimidating the ‘others’ but also threatening those liberal Hindus 

As religion is being pushed deeper into politics the intolerance level in the society is going up. The challenge of our times is to distinguish between the politics in the name of religion and religion per se. 

Mr Nariman’s statement reflects how the veteran jurist is disappointed with the democratic liberal ethos being challenged by the rising assertion of the Hindutva politics led by the RSS combine.  

On a personal note I have long been receiving good number of hate mails routinely, as these articles of critical of politics in the name of Hinduism, or politics in the name of any religion for that matter. I know that another article on RSS and Hindu nationalism is going to uptick the quota of the hate mails for me.

Read More